Andor D. Skotnes, The Black Freedom Movement and the Worker's Movement in Baltimore, 1930-1939, Rutger's PhD, 1991,
Image No: 456
   Enlarge and print image (60K)            << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space


 

Andor D. Skotnes, The Black Freedom Movement and the Worker's Movement in Baltimore, 1930-1939, Rutger's PhD, 1991,
Image No: 456
   Enlarge and print image (60K)            << PREVIOUS   NEXT >>
456 emerging leadership grouping included many of the Baltimore figures taking leadership in the BIQ plus several figures from Washington, D.C. (like Sidney Katz of the United Federal Workers, who was elected secretary of the council) and Western Maryland (like president John T. Jones). In addition to constituting the MDCIUC, the convention discussed and voted on twenty-nine resolutions on regional, national, and international matters. In the deluge of discussions and issues, three facets of the convention stood out. First, the fact that the CIO in Maryland was a regional movement, with Baltimore as its principal center, became obvious. This was earlier evident in the relationship between the Baltimore movement and massive strikes at Kelly-Springfield Tire Company and Celanese Corporation in Cumberland: the Baltimore CIO gave active support and even leant personnel to these struggles, which in turn reinforced the movement in Baltimore. While the convention also showed that Washington would be an important contributor to the regional movement, it was clear that the industrial movement in Baltimore had the bulk of the resources and the organic relationship to the city's hinterlands necessary to function as the center of the state-wide struggle. The second striking facet of the state CIO convention was the participation of the left. Many of the trade unionists present were left-wing industrial unionists and may well have been Communists or Socialists. Some were open, at least in other contexts, about their politics: Dorothy and Albert Blumberg who were present representing the office workers and the teachers respectively were well known members of the Baltimore Communist Party, for example. Not surprisingly, the record shows that, in contrast to the AFL convention, there was no red-baiting. The record contains, however, no open mention of the fact that members of left- wing parties were present; this fact seemed to be a sort of open secret, as was the case in many Popular Front formations during these years.^ The final facet of the MDCIUC convention to be noted was its assertive